Abstract
Understanding the complicated relationship between energy, climate and security is vital both to the study of international relations and to ensure the continued survival of a world increasingly threatened by environmental change. Climate change is largely caused by burning fossil fuels for energy, but while discussions on the climate consider the role of energy, energy security debates largely overlook climate concerns. This article traces the separation between energy and climate through an analysis of US energy security discourse and policy. It shows that energy security is continually constructed as national security, which enables very particular policy choices and prioritises it above climate concerns. Thus, in many cases, policies undertaken in the name of energy security contribute directly to climate insecurity. The article argues that the failure to consider securing the climate as inherently linked to energy security is not just problematic, but, given global warming, potentially harmful. Consequently, any approach to dealing with climate change has to begin by rethinking energy security and security more broadly, as national (energy) security politics no longer provides security in any meaningful sense.
Highlights
Energy supply is a matter of national security. (Bush 2006)Producing more oil and gas here at home has been, and will continue to be, a critical part of an all-of-the-above energy strategy. (Obama 2012d)In the United States, energy security has long been considered an issue of national security, and it remains centred on fossil fuel supply
This article has argued that energy security and climate change are closely related, and dealing with both requires fundamentally rethinking security
The growing speed of environmental change caused by climate change has profound implications for how we understand security
Summary
Producing more oil and gas here at home has been, and will continue to be, a critical part of an all-of-the-above energy strategy. (Obama 2012d). The lack of critical conceptual and normative analyses of energy security is problematic, though Mulligan and Simpson provide a focus on the referent object of energy security This is the first study to date that traces energy security discourse and policy in an empirical case study to show the 11 connection between energy and national security and how it works to prioritise national energy security over climate change mitigation and enables a continued focus on fossil fuels to secure the state in energy terms. What has really been secured here is the profitability of American energy companies, economic growth being central to national security: in practice, it has had very little positive impact on the climate ( with increasing arguments in favour of exporting the US coal, oil and gas Ð which would mean losing the climate benefits of the domestic consumption reduction as the fuels would be consumed elsewhere). If such a Ôbroader understanding of security is invoked [É] the possibilities for less violent and more constructive responses open upÕ (Dalby 2009: 129)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of International Relations and Development
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
